Traore v. Rikers Island C95, and C76 Medical Staff

Background

Abdoulaye Traore filed this self-represented action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that defendants violated his constitutional rights while he was detained at Rikers Island. He alleged unsanitary conditions, staff shortages, violence, lack of cleaning supplies, used razors, no recreation or visits, no incoming or outgoing mail, no law library, and no religious services. He also alleged that COVID-19-positive detainees were not separated and that he did not receive mental-health medication or treatment for several weeks. He sought $70 million in damages.

The court had already allowed Traore to proceed without prepaying filing fees. It screened the complaint under the federal statute requiring dismissal of claims that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim, or seek money from an immune defendant. The court also applied the requirement that a complaint contain enough specific facts to make a claim plausible.

Claims already raised in other cases

The court dismissed Traore’s COVID-19 claim and mental-health claim without prejudice to litigation of those claims in two other pending cases: 22-CV-1429 and 22-CV-1430. The opinion states that the claims were asserted in those prior related proceedings and remained pending there.

New claims

The court found that Traore’s general allegations about conditions of confinement did not state a viable claim because he did not identify a specific serious condition, explain how long he experienced it, or allege facts showing that an individual defendant knew of a specific serious risk and ignored it. The court granted him leave to provide those facts in an amended complaint.

Traore’s statement that there was no incoming or outgoing mail did not state a First Amendment mail claim. He did not allege specific interference with his mail, harm to a legal matter, or an ongoing censorship practice. The court granted leave to amend that claim with facts showing legal harm or an unjustified ongoing censorship practice.

Traore’s allegation that there was no law library did not state an access-to-courts claim because he did not allege that he was representing himself in criminal proceedings or that the lack of a library prevented him from pursuing a legal claim. The opinion later granted general leave to amend the complaint and directed him to provide additional facts about his claims.

Traore’s allegation that there were no religious services did not explain the nature of his religious beliefs or how the lack of services substantially burdened his religious practice. The court granted leave to amend this claim. The opinion discussed both the First Amendment’s protection of religious exercise and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act.

Named defendants

The court dismissed Traore’s claims against the “Rikers Island C95 and C76 medical staff” for failure to state a claim. It explained that medical staff, without identifying particular people, is not a person who can be sued under § 1983, and that Rikers Island is not such a person either. The court allowed Traore to amend his § 1983 claims to name individual Department of Correction staff members, including John or Jane Doe defendants if he did not yet know their names.

Leave to amend and disposition

The court granted Traore 60 days to file an amended complaint. The amended complaint must replace, rather than supplement, the original complaint and must identify each defendant, describe the relevant events and each defendant’s conduct, state the injuries, and identify the requested relief. The court warned that failure to file a compliant amended complaint within the deadline, absent good cause, would result in dismissal for failure to state a claim.

The court certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without prepaying fees for an appeal. The order did not finally resolve the merits of the claims that could be amended.